§ The result
1 point separates Teamtailor and TalentLens.
Teamtailor holds a 1-point edge over TalentLens under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. TalentLens takes 3 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 4 for Teamtailor, whose share includes FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to TalentLens — TalentLens 45, Teamtailor 30, on an 18% weight — which is 78% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
Vendor profile
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
TalentLens is filed under Assessment AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only TalentLens is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | TalentLens | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SE |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
TalentLens 45 · Teamtailor 30
2.7 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
TalentLens 30 · Teamtailor 42
1.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
TalentLens 50 · Teamtailor 58
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
TalentLens 32 · Teamtailor 42
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
20% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
TalentLens 52 · Teamtailor 50
0.4 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
TalentLens 57 · Teamtailor 54
0.4 weighted points to TalentLens
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
TalentLens 58 · Teamtailor 62
0.3 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is TalentLens minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | TalentLens | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 54 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 47 (F) | -1 | -1.1 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | TalentLens | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- TalentLens last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next